Monday, July 17: John at Discriminations blogs about a law school dean’s idea of diversity, which he doubts goes deeper than melanin. I concur.
——————————————————————-
No matter how much hate e-mail I get or how many nasty blog posts my opinions generate, I will keep talking and writing about the hypocrisy of racialist double standards, the immorality of race preferences, and the unvarnished truth about skin color and cultural “diversity.” I expect naysayers to misrepresent this post as they do others, but that can’t be helped. I have no control over it.
There is a growing movement in the United States to mainstream mediocrity and define deviancy down. All cultures, ways of life, or however you want to define the ideals under which we live, are not equal, nor were they meant to be. American culture, for lack of a better term, is far better than any other on earth, including its diverse subcultures.
Among the native-born population, subcultures develop under the influence of American culture. They are dependent on and part of the main culture.
Some groups of foreigners retain part of their culture while assimilating into American culture. Other foreigners retain all of their culture and have no desire to assimilate into American culture. The latter group is a threat to how we live.
In fact, the immigrant of old is quickly becoming a relic. People land on these shores and demand from us that which would have gotten them imprisoned or killed in their home countries. With everyone from homosexuals to Muslims glomming on to the “civil rights” meme, it’s no great surprise that illegal aliens — lawbreakers — have become emboldened to demand “civil rights.”
I put the phrase in quotes because these people don’t want the obligations that come with those rights; they only want the benefits. Illegal aliens who’ve broken our laws take to our streets and demand the protection of our laws. They want to be special, not equal. They don’t want to play by the rules; they want exceptions. But the sword cuts both ways.
Illegal alien protests are only a small example of a much larger problem in the U.S. I don’t know exactly when the seed was planted, but I’d say it began to sprout and flourish in the last 20 years or so. What am I talking about? Diversity, the idea that value exists in differences, as defined by social engineers. There’s nothing valuable or worth celebrating about differences per se. Differences just are. But someone sold the idea that the dominant culture was no better than its subcultures, and that all values were equally valid and “good.” Or that the culture of an African or other third world country was not inferior to American, or Western culture.
Anybody with eyes, ears, heart, and mind knows this is not true. The ideals upon which our country was built are far superior to any other. And yes, the people who dared to dream of such a place and participate in this grand experiment are superior to others in all the ways that count.
Why do reasonable people allow the dumbing down and degradation? Why are we complicit in our own destruction? Why have we let social engineers and America-haters define for us what is good and evil? For instance, like it or not, America exists because of those vilified “dead white males.” Centuries of western thought culminated into where and how we now live. A system that is highly ordered and allows individual liberty and provides economic incentive is far superior to one that is disorganized and represses individuals and forces people to labor for the benefit its rulers. A nation whose people share a common language and culture is far superior to a balkanized one where different cultures are constantly jockeying for position.
What makes America unique is e pluribus unum, one made out of many. While America may not have begun with diverse racial and ethnic groups, the founders laid the foundation for a time they had not foreseen. That’s the beauty of it. Guided by the hand of God, they didn’t need to foresee it. All they needed to do was build the foundation on solid, objectively good principles, and yes, Christian values, and the rest fell into place. America wasn’t built on “white values.” It was built on human values, with recognition to God-given rights.
But people opposed to these rights are trying to break the foundation and create something new, something that is doomed to fail. America works because it is America. It will cease to work if it becomes a third world nation and dominated by inferior subcultures. Special interest groups and organizations intent on tearing up the foundation and changing the dominant culture to suit their needs are destroying the country.
Where did this idea of special or “group rights” come from? As much as I appreciate what the Civil Rights movement has done for me, it was this era that group rights became acceptable, particularly for “minorities.” I won’t get into why I think that’s the case because I’ve written about it before and don’t have time to get into here.
For instance, blacks are not judged as individuals. We are a group with special, not equal, rights. In the aftermath of the movement, into the 1970s, racial entitlements crept in. The mere fact that a person was black meant that he was automatically regarded as someone needing remedial help. Special admission tracks and hiring quotas were set up. All types of grievance, no matter how trivial and ignorant, became legitimate in the eyes of guilty whites. Equal opportunity gave way to equal outcomes, the absence of which was evidence of “racism.”
The same is happening with “Hispanics” and Latinos. Group rights, special rights, are all the rage. Based on misplaced white guilt, the dominant culture started to cave long ago, turning their collective back on objective truths and principles and allowing every racial and cultural minority group with a grievance to make claims and demand that which they don’t deserve and didn’t earn. Every racial and cultural minority — except whites — is allowed to lobby for its race and culture, to demand acquiescence (and tax dollars).
Ed Morrissey expresses my thoughts in his post on respect for our way of life, particularly the idea of equal treatment under the law.
A couple of weeks ago I posed the question of why we allow racial double standards. Why are groups that promote the interests of people of African or Latin American or Middle Eastern descent acceptable, but groups that promote the interests of whites, or people of European descent, unacceptable? I have yet to hear or read a logically sound answer. Emotion-laden responses are a dime a dozen, as they typically are when race is discussed. Nobody wants to think about the questions and answer them honestly.
As far as racialist groups are concerned, I believe Americans should show more loyalty to their country than to their skin color. But if we’re going to accept one group’s racial grievances as legitimate, we have to use the same standards and accept the grievances of all racial groups, including whites.
In that “controversial” post, I blogged about an hispanic racialist group called La Raza, which has zero interest in “diversity.” Last month I wrote about race-based, government-subsidized schools in California supported by La Raza in “I’m A Libertarian on Education.” Michelle Malkin’s latest column is about similar La Raza-supported schools.
Imagine, if you can, a government-subsidized school that promoted white separatism. The outrage would be unbelievable. (I have no problem with race- or sex-based private schools. Freedom of assembly is guaranteed in our Constitution.) But groups like La Raza are not condemned. They are courted and coddled. Karl Rove recently spoke to the racialist group, droning on about “immigration.” Joseph Farah does an excellent job expressing my thoughts on the matter. Read it and learn.
Rove said:
Everything that this country is, everything that we have achieved, everything that we hold, everything that we promise, is because we are a nation of diversity, brought together by immigration, and sharing a common dream.
Lawrence Auster, whom some call a racist, also expresses my thoughts. You see, unlike most, I listen to what people have to say before I make judgments, especially if what they say is considered “politically incorrect.” Their desire to protect America and maintain our way of life is far more important to me than the color of their skin. Auster responded to Rove:
So, diversity is everything that America is, everything that it means, and this diversity is only held together by … no, not by the self-evident truths that “all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,†but by a “dream.†Held together by a dream? What is a dream? A dream is someone’s wishes and desires. Bush and Rove have cast aside the objective truths of human nature that America was founded on and are declaring a new America, founded on everyone’s wishes and desires.
Those objective truths of human nature, the ones that enable each and every inhabitant of this country to live his life in peace and benefit from the labor of his own mind and hands, regardless of skin color or country of origin. The perversity of diversity is that it denies men these rights, engineering coercive policies, whereby one man’s freedom and the fruits of his labor are slowly siphoned away to those who didn’t earn them and to whom he’s done no harm.
Diversity, as defined by leftists, is a skin deep-only mish-mash of false premises based on raising the “self-esteem” of one group and alleviating the guilt of another at the expense of objective truth and to the detriment of us all.
The problem I encounter when I write posts like this is that I’ve touched on many different subjects — race preferences, illegal “immigration,” God — and tried to pull them together in an organized and coherent manner. Sometimes I fail. Certain people will read this post and render judgment without taking the time to read a few pages of the archives to get a better sense of context. As I wrote before, that can’t be helped. I trust that thoughtful, mature, and smart people who really want to learn and expand their own thinking will invest the time to read other posts before they comment.
The Cultural Decline category is worth a read. The Race Preferences category will shed light on why I criticize racial grievances. The Faith category will also help you understand why I think and write the way I do. There are several pages in each category, so click Next Page at the bottom to keep reading.
I can’t allow misunderstanding, misreading, and misinterpretation to deter me from my mission. I despise hypocrisy, moral relativity and equivalency, “diversity” as defined by white liberals, special rights, degradation of the principles that made America the great country it is today (principles which, ironically, give people who hate those principles the freedom to speak out against them!), and anyone who presumes to judge me based on my membership in a racial group rather than on my worth as a human being and an individual.
I despise cowardice, effeteness, pettiness, and people who tell me how and what I ought to think, especially when the “advice” is based on my membership in a racial group.
Diversity, as defined by leftists, has led to the perversion of American ideals. I predict that one day, after I’m long dead and buried, perhaps when those born this decade are old men and women, America won’t be great, as defined by this generation. It will be a balkanized, multilingual mass of racial and ethnic groups fighting over dwindling resources while the elites — the white liberals who engineered the whole mess — observe their dastardly handiwork.
Of interest:
{ 5 trackbacks }
{ 91 comments }
That’s one of the most brilliant essays I’ve ever read on this or any other topic.
LaShawn,
Once again, you are right on target. As my office manager says “You go girl!”.
Regards,
Jim
Garden City, Kansas
I could not agree with you more. Keep speaking out! Your voice is so very much needed. Your post says what we all need to hear and no one can express these sentiments more eloquently than you.
Lashawn,
As usual, your writing is fabulous! It amazes me every single time. I am so thankful for bloggers and the internet. I and so many others don’t have to feel alone any more. It used to be I would almost be to the point of thinking ‘am I the only one’ who thinks these thoughts? They’re not even close to rocket science, they’re just common sense for goodness sake. Never never let the nutty folks shut you up! I do so look forward to the day, race can REALLY be discussed and skin color preferences gone. I hope I live that long. I’m a 42 year old white woman, and you are my idol!
Thanks for what you do.
Jill
>>”Bush and Rove have cast aside the objective truths of human nature that America was founded on and are declaring a new America, founded on everyone’s wishes and desires.” -This statement from Auster reminded me of the movie ‘Bruce Almighty.’ I missed the middle of the film but caught the end where Bruce was wandering the streets of his city that was exploding in chaos. He lamented, “I thought they’d be happy if I just gave them everything they wanted.” (paraphrase) I thought it was a good illustration of why a society can’t thrive on the philosophy of everyone demanding and getting what they want like spoiled little children.
You are absolutely on target. When you decide to publish hard copy, it’ll be required reading for my students and my family.
God has blessed you. My prayer is that He will continue to do so.
Some groups of foreigners retain part of their culture while assimilating into American culture. Other foreigners retain all of their culture and have no desire to assimilate into American culture. These groups are a threat to how we live.
Just for clarification, are you referring to the latter set of groups (who retain all of their culture) or both sets of groups (which includes the retainers of part of their culture while assimilating into American culture)?
The other morning I was sitting at a table with a Chinese woman, an Indiana, an Italian and a Puerto Rican (no, I’m not trying to make a joke). We had a wonderful conversation about religion, without really giving much thought to our differences.
It seems to me that liberal America is more hung up on our differences than any of us are.
Nice Post. I’m a first time visitor to the site. I clicked around and took time to absorb some your postings (some of which I disagreed with heavily.) However, I think the premise of today’s commentary is important. As a Black man and a long time college student (currently getting my masters), I have been grouped more times than necessary with other black people who I have no commonalities with. (Your past comments on diversity training were right on and college campuses are a haven for the perversion you speak of.) From my own experience, the so-called “perversity of diversity†leaves us with more stereotypes and groupthink. Group behavior traps us. I agree – individuality is important, but it’s tough to acquire it in this world – in this country. Furthermore, it’s difficult this to spread your message to the many apathetic black folks who have been taught to view the world as “Us versus Them.â€
Throughout this terrific post, LaShawn references “engineering” repeatedly; she ends with: “the elites — the white liberals who engineered the whole mess — observe their dastardly handiwork.” AMEN.
But understand this: engineering is an exacting science. “Social engineering” is a lot of rubbish. Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin and the Taliban were among the most successful “social engineers.”
“Social engineering” is a pseudo science and useful mainly for the purposes of propaganda. There are lots of pseudo sciences out there: scientific opinion polling, sociology, political science, multiculturalism, diversity training, community outreach, planned parenthood, Scientology, astrology, and on and on.
Just how in the world do you “engineer” diversity? Isn’t that the same as herding cats?
My life as a teacher was spent combating the concept of “situation ethics.” Nearly every liberal will tell you that all of ethics is “situational.” They have to say this, because they need a million loopholes and escape hatches to think the way they do.
Liberals have canonized the concept of “diversity” because it is the mother load of loopholes and escape hatches.
If you want to stop a room full of liberals dead in their mealy-mouthed tracks, ask them to each write down the “definition” of diversity. Bingo! If there are 20 responses, you will not find anything remotely resembling a common thread.
Typically, diversity for a liberal is not unlike the famous Clinton retort: “It depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”
LaShawn – excellent work! Couldn’t have said it better myself!
>>Just how in the world do you “engineer†diversity?>>
Well, we could start by prohibiting intermarriage…after all, if diversity is our goal, we must maintain it, right? You can’t maintain diversity if people just go right ahead and intermarry and create mixed-culture children. We have to ensure the _purity_ of diversity and prohibit _any_ intermarriage or cohabitation of individuals with _any_ person who is not of their own specific diversity group…
Then of course, we’d have to rank the groups – so that those who were most backward would be offered the greatest social boosts. You know…sort of like handicapping horse races…the ideal outcome of handicapping a horse race is that the race would end in a dead heat – no winners. Since the ideal outcome here is that everybody would end up with exactly the same assets and respect, we have to handicap those who have a head start by having more dollars, more smarts or whatever, and offer some sort of programs to elevate those who are starting from behind. I guess we’d have to assign judges as the “umpires” to keep track and make sure no one actually got _ahead_ of anybody…
La Shawn for President!
Shade,
Obviously from the context of the essay as a whole, La Shawn’s intended meaning in the passage you quote, is that it is fine to retain some of your cultural heritage as you assimilate into the mainstream of American society. What is dangerous is the refusal to assimilate, and to continue to live a separate lifestyle from the country as a whole, retaining your own language and culture while rejecting the language and culture of America.
Montie
I was 95% sure that that was the meaning of the passage, but I wanted to make sure. In that case, I agree 100%. Likewise, if a person assimilates, yet retains aspects of his or her previous culture that are negative, you still have a problem. Now the Martial Arts are an example of how America has benefited from the inclusion of an aspect of another culture since Martial Arts have been utilized by police forces, the military, and the average citizen to develop discipline, physical fitness, and self defense skills.
LaShawn, I found your blog through Tammy Bruce’s blog, and I’m so glad I did. Your writing is outstanding, and you have so much courage and integrity and strength. Please keep up the good work, and may G-d bless you with all good things.
La Shawn
Great post as usual. What I found most thought provoking was your statement:
>>And yes, the people who dared to dream of such a place and participate in this grand experiment are superior to others in all the ways that count.
LaShawn–
I was thinking along the same lines recently. I’m reading “The Knowledge Deficit” by E.D. Hirsch, Jr. which argues that the only way to improve reading comprehension in children is to increase their general knowledge of the world. This led me to thinking about how there no longer seems to be a “core canon” that every educated American is expected to know, or at least recognize. When I was growing up, for example, ~all~ 8th Graders were expected to memorize the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution and to be able to paraphrase the Bill of Rights. Similarly, in literature, all students read (at one time or another) “To Kill a Mocking Bird,” “The Diary of Anne Frank,” “Huckleberry Finn,” “The Great Gatsby,” “The Scarlet Letter,” at least one of Shakespeare’s plays (usually “MacBeth” or “Hamlet”), and a sampling of English poets. This “core canon” gave us common references to use in discussion and in our writing.
Thanks to “Cultural Diversity” and the need to ensure that no culture is slighted, this has changed. It’s not unusual for every student in a high school English class to read a different book. How can I challenge your understanding of the text if I didn’t read it? How can I understand the allusions to “Pride & Prejudice” that are in “Bridget Jones’ Diary” if I haven’t read “Pride & Prejudice”? (Okay, that’s a silly example.)
I haven’t finished the “The Knowledge Deficit” yet. When I do, I’ll review it on my blog and maybe discuss this idea further.
Sorry for hijacking your comments!
My pastor mentioned that when one stands for truth, more often than not, they find themselves standing alone, all by themselves.
No matter what Miss Barber, never stop speaking the truth, no matter how lonely it may get. You are an amazing woman!
Great post as always LaShawn.
La Shawn, I first want to thank you, I’ve been on here for a month or two now, I started the magic of a blog yesterday (I’d been meaning to and that was the spur that got me there). It has helped my sanity already to get the thinking out in the open and it’s great. As for this topic, it reminds me of an experience as a new RA, I had my “diversity training” and along with several other people managed to essentially lead the schools dean of multicultural affairs to admit that his goal was to promote cultures other then “white” or “anglo” cultures. Then 2 weeks later I had 2 young black women walk into my room and ask me if I had any (I kid you not) “Multicultural” students. I said to them “Yes, everyone on my hall has a culture” They abridged their request to ask if I had any black students…at least they were straight.
(Comment No. 15. by Shade.)
I agree that martial arts are beneficial as a whole to the American Nation.
I think what is lacking in this debate are more specifics like that.
I’m sure pretty much everyone here would agree that *many* foreign cultural elements are detrimental to the American way of life (as first envisaged by the Founding Fathers) Now it is identified that the reality of ‘multi-culturalism’ is a liberal ‘motherlode’ of loopholes and excuses for supporting criminality, communism and white liberal guilt. So why now don’t we compose lists of (1)the undesirable elements of foreign cultures and (2) the desirable elements of foreign cultures in order to reach a level of clarity on what we both oppose and support. Leave the ‘fuzzy’ concept of ‘multicultural’ America to it’s rightful (single) parents: The liberals.
I assume it’s a given (here) that illegals are undesirable at any level, so surely all that is left is to agree what is and isn’t acceptable or desirable from legal immigrants/existing legal ‘communities’ within America?. Otherwise it’s about as fuzzy a concept as ‘multiculturalism’ itself. And I’m definitely for de-fuzzing the situation. Fuzzy is for liberals!
OK, my suggestions:
(1) Undesirables:
Mono-lingual non-English speakers.
Muslims
Non-Christian cults
Ebonics
‘rap’ culture
‘gang’ culture
Native American reservation ‘culture’
Communist ‘culture’
Homosexual ‘culture’
Feminist ‘culture’
Feminist communist ‘culture’
homosexual communist ‘culture’
Single parent ‘culture’
Welfare ‘culture’
(2) Desirables:
Martial Arts
Christianity
Certain foreign cooking methods (to be discussed)
Certain foreign clothing elements
(Slightly) foreign-accented English speakers
Those are just a few examples and other’s might agree disagree with some or all of them. But the point here is to de-fuzzy the debate.
What is and isn’t acceptable for America? Surely until you can decide those *exact* things and enforce them, it’s just tilting at fuzzy liberal wind-bags/windmills?
Brilliant once again!
La Shawn I feel so lucky to have stumbled upon your blog. As a White American I had never been too aware of my race until I moved to Los Angeles where I feel its often the only way I am defined. I never imagined (I know…foolish guy)before I came that I would see much racial tension or much less that I would care, but as a 3 year resident of this city I do. It’s often said that what begins in California eventually will follow into other parts of the country, and while that has brought many wonderful things to the rest of the nation, I fear that the trend is becoming to export more of the wrong things about LA across the state borders. As you can imagine La Raza is very influential in my neighborhood. I didnt have to watch the MayDay rally on TV I sat on my stoop to see all that the networks were not gonna show you. Anyway, not sure I make too much sense,but I’ve been reading your blog for a couple months now and wanted to finally say how much I enjoy it. Thanks for your bravery.
John D, I can’t tell if you’re joking or not, but either way, the major flaw with this plan is that we’d be implying that there’s something wrong with someone…we can’t possibly do that, everyone’s okay just the way they are and to suggest otherwise would be too horrible to imagine. Just think, asking someone to change to be more easily accepted in the culture they elected to join would be horrible…bite your tongue *falls over from sarcasm overload*
How can these liberals condone the behaviour of a Muslim man when he beats his wife, because “it’s cultural, it’s in the Koran”; but if a non-Muslim does it, it’s “Domestic Abuse”? Justice is one standard for all, or no standard for any.
#22 JohnD has proclaimed: “I’m sure pretty much everyone here would agree that *many* foreign cultural elements are detrimental to the American way of life (as first envisaged by the Founding Fathers)”
If JohnD believes that “pretty much everyone here” agrees that “*many* foreign cultural elements are detrimental to the American way of life” then JohnD clearly believes most of LaShawn’s readers and responders are Neanderthal nativists.
A great many of us are Christians, proud and true. A great many of us place a high value on personal responsibility. Many of us have tasted discrimination, the effects of poverty and debilitating addictions. Many of us appreciate the guardrails of a moral system. Many of us do not turn to the government as the great source of all solutions, nor do we believe that more and more taxation can result in the elimination of addiction, poverty, discrimination, reversing the collapse of the family unit, the increase in the education success rate, a great reduction in crime and on and on.
Without significant moral guardrails, society only manages to careen from situation to situation until some “political correctness” group gets annoyed and goes into harpy mode. That invite the type of chaos that spawns dictatorship.
Lord Kelvin once posited that everything can be measured. His fool idea gained a following until it was laid bare by the paucity of any underlying common sense.
The idea that everything can be relegated to a list is to miss the point of Locke, Hume, St. Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, Gandhi, Jefferson, Erasmus and so many others.
Good grief!
I, too, am a loyal fan. Thanks, La Shawn, for providing insightful, unbiased, tell-it-like-it-is prose on what is happening in our World today.
I’m sure I don’t have to tell you that this was your calling… As far as I’m concerned, a day without your blog, is a day without introspection and enlightenment. I enjoy what you write so much that it’s the first thing I read when I get up in the morning!
You should be syndicated (Nancy Grace, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX). I predict that someday soon you will be…
Keep up the exceptional work. Rock on, Sister La Shawn!
I only got to read the first half, because I was just caught by this before heading out. As “The Assimilated Negro” I think i agree with the spirit of your sentiment. But I don’t agree with the hunt of “difference”. Difference is more important than sameness. Sameness = stagnance. Difference = evolution. From the rest of my skim it seems you’re steering towards having a problem with the mainstream or media definition of difference/diversity. But I think there’s a seed of truth on both sides …
no time now … I’ll be back.
Opinions. The United States is the only developed country that routinely circumcises its infant boys for non-religious reasons. The rest of the developed world sees this as an odd, backward, and archaic American tradition. Would anyone consider this a negative or positive aspect of American culture?
Word on, as usual. BTY, I belong to a sporting club that is mostly Irish (legal)immigrants. The motto for the club is “Irish tradition; American pride.” Assimilation is the goal! This is certainly a big difference from many other ethnic groups. Keep doing what you are doing. I pray for you and your mission daily.
#30. Shade, I would consider it a personal decision, hopefully made by a married mother and father.
However, in keeping with the diversity/perversity theme, perhaps we should all just be neutral and accepting and look upon female circumcision as a valued icon of enlightened multiculturalism.
Or not.
You are brilliant. This essay literally brought tears to my eyes–for the country I love, the country we’re rapidly losing, the one my children will likely never know.
‘Siyo, Again I thank you for speaking the truth. Bear
I live in a small to medium sized town in the rural part of Virginia where a majority of the residents are poor. We are about 80% white, 15% black, and we have a growing illegal immigration problem. What’s interesting is that the elite in our small town are all Indian Immigrants who adhere to the Hindu religion; they own a lot of commercial properties, and are about 70% of the town’s doctors. As a lawyer who deals with settlements and closings, I have become very close with the Indian families and I have been very interested in their opinions on immigration and illegal immigrants.
Many of them have been very candid with me and what they have told me is very revealing. Many openly say that Americans who are born here, both black and white, are actually destroying themsleves with a culture that promotes lazyness and sex. They have criticized blacks and have said they get enraged when they see black women spending 90% of their paycheck on a ridiculous hairstyle. The also criticize white people since they think they have no concept of family. They are shocked to see the amount of divorces that take place, and the fact that kicking kids out of the house at 18 is glorified, which only encourages greed and family abandonment. One Dr. told me he was saddened by the complaceny that exists in people who already have an advtange in speaking the native language, yet settle for working at bars or as cashiers in the local retail store. He can’t believe that people don’t value education in this country.
Another Dr. said that all these people are getting angry at illegal immigrants coming in and doing all these jobs, but hes observed that the people getting angry call in sick about twice a week, sit at home and obsess about various celebrities, and don’t really care if their kids are doing well in school.
A lot of these Dr.’s were basically criticizing modern American culture, and they weren’t looking favorably upon white or black people, and said the lazyness, greed, and sloth promoted by American culture had contributed to society’s decline and a demand for illegal immigrants.
I find myself agreeing with them more and more.
Pennsylvania Town Enacts Strict Illegal Immigration Ordinance
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,203513,00.html
“Lawrence Auster, whom some call a racist, also expresses my thoughts. You see, unlike most, I listen to what people have to say before I make judgments, especially if what they say is considered “politically incorrect.†Their desire to protect America and maintain our way of life is far more important to me than the color of their skin.”
Lawrence Auster is another hero of Stormfront, the Neo-Nazis. For all the claims of it ‘not being about the colour of skin’, why then do people like Auster persevere with claims that it is in fact ALL about race?
“Mr. Auster stated at an American Renaissance Conference, “Either blacks accept the above facts; accept a society where white Western standards of law, behavior and intellectual life are dominant and where advancement will be open for blacks only on an individual, not a collective basis; accept their status as an ethnic minority and be grateful to be living in a white society where they have goods and opportunities undreamed of in a black society; or else, if blacks are not willing to accept these things, then to avoid race warfare there must be peaceful separation between the races.â€
Yet again here we have Neo-nazis at the head of the argument. They murdered millions of non-Nazis. Their distrust and claims for superiority of ‘foreigners’ (non ‘Aryan’ races) is what drives their hate and delusions of supremacy.
Are we supposed to roll over and finally accept their white supremacist arguments because of ghetto-ized populations?
Less than one lifetime ago we were fighting the Nazis with all the blood and resources we had.
Now we are citing them as experts on ‘racial’ problems and National policy??
Sickening.
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?p=239460
I vow that every molecule of my being will oppose them to the end. It is not ‘politically correct’ to oppose Nazis, any more than it is ‘politically correct’ to oppose the Taliban.
LaShawn,
I am a long-time silent “lurker” and have really enjoyed your site. I’ve often been impressed with you but this one is by far one of the best pieces I’ve read ANYPLACE on this topic.
Daaang, when’d you get so smart anyhow?
J. Fogle
#26
Heliotrope claimed:
“If JohnD believes that “pretty much everyone here†agrees that “*many* foreign cultural elements are detrimental to the American way of life†then JohnD clearly believes most of LaShawn’s readers and responders are Neanderthal nativists.”
Not a very good try at putting words in my mouth.
I’ve already asked you politely to refrain from making assumptive personal attacks and smears.
When I say that a great many here are opposed to undesirable culutural elements in American society I mean *just* that. I mean EXACTLY that.
Will you disagree that ebonics is bad for America? Will you disagree that Islam is bad for America? How about Hispanic gang culture? One need hardly be a ‘neanderthal nativist’ to oppose such cultural elements. Or do you disagree that these elements are detrimental?
Rather than make a personal attack and a smear campaign, please answer the points I made above. I argue that it is much more interesting to discuss points/opinions other than to attack posters with slurs and false claims.
“The idea that everything can be relegated to a list is to miss the point of Locke, Hume, St. Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, Gandhi, Jefferson, Erasmus and so many others.”
I did not say that we should ‘relegate’ to a list. I am saying that the general dissatisfaction with ‘unamerican’ elelements needs to be de-fuzzyfied before action can be taken.
Is that such a wild idea?
God Bless You and thanks for this site… We all need to hear this. I wrote something similar to this for our local newspaper forum:
Topic: QUESTION OF SLAVERY AND ITS EXISTENCE TODAY
This was a question that was asked to a friend in Louisiana during a college class discussion this week and it became a very interesting discussion…some did not want to discuss it, afraid of offending people of color in the group…this is what I gave her…please give your opinion, I will share them with her at a later date:
This was the moderator’s opening statement:
This subject may well cause a great deal of controversy and people will bristle at some of the issues that may arise. However, we believe that slavery exists in myriad ways. Each person in the group began to voice various opinions on this subject, some were negative and others were in question…they admitted that they weren’t sure. Some went all off into left field with answers, such as Mardi Gras Indians, French settlement, Europeans, etc.
The conversation was becoming boring, lengthy and drawn out and another gentleman gave her this statement:
I have avoided this for a long time. But, it is time to cut to the chase. The slaves of the past are just that. The slaves of the “now” are slaves to themselves. Your freedom lies within. Done deal. Deal with it.
The moderator replied: You may disagree with what we ultimately say but you may agree. Yes the bounds of slaverly can be cast off by the persons of strength but what if that strength is destroyed by questionable means?
At that point, I felt like I knew where he was coming from. I gave this statement for her to go on…
Only because I’ve had my first cup of coffee this morning, that I may attempt to deal with this early in the morning….
You stated and asked someone the question:
Yes the bounds of slaverly can be cast off by the persons of strength but what if that strength is destroyed by questionable means?
Since we are speaking in parables today…that can be a yes and no answer, all in who you ask and who really knows their history. But I agree with the previous gentleman and his statement.
Slavery has long been abolished, although many of our ancestors didn’t get to enjoy their freedom in a timely manner (no fault of theirs, thank you), and that was hundreds of years ago. I can only speak as a person of color born in the 50s in New Orleans, abandoned at Charity Hospital at birth (whoever she was, I’m grateful, I ended up with great parents), a ward of the state for the first year of life, and have been given ancesteral stories from my adoptive parents that were born in 1914 and 1917 respectively, them being born to slave parents from East Texas (father) and Clinton, La. (mother), hearing the stories of their treks living in southeast Lousiana over the years, i.e., education, work conditions, voting rights, housing rights, etc., we’ve been blessed (not lucky) as a people despite poplar opinions.
Overtime (decades), a younger generation (multiple races) has been permanently damaged by masked governmental manipulations (ah oh, I’m in trouble now!):
1-Creation of the welfare & food stamp system as we know it today (should’ve made it STRICTLY for the elderly, healthy poor people still can work)
2-Medicaid/Medicare (should’ve been STRICTLY for the elderly & governed EXTREMELY closely with the disabled because that’s where your problem is today). Instead of Charity Hospital for the poor and indigent, the government allowed welfare recipients to CHOOSE their private physicians and private hospitals for their pregnancies and deliveries, thus, making the physicians one rich group of people at $1,000.00 a visit (now calculate that when you’re seeing about 20 patients a day, not counting diagnostic testing)…geez, and the cost of a delivery, C-section, premature birth, drug-addicted newborn, etc. (man, ya’ll making a killing). I’ve processed your bills & charges at work…and then the government says they can’t get a tubal ligation to prevent future pregnancies if they are under the age of 21 – and we know that many will have most of the babies under the age of 21….as Emeril would say…BAMMMM!!!!
3-Prayer in schools (if you didn’t want to hear them or participate, step outside or stop up your ears as they did when I was in school (majority wins), but noooo, ACLU says we’re infringing on others rights! I had teachers who didn’t want to pray, but they just kept silent. They recited the Pledge of Allegiance – some just didn’t participate (that was ok), but noooooo, you had to rid it altogether.
4-Government housing (HUD started it, gave it to them with hardly any strings attached and now decades later, they are called your neighborhood trash, but you, the government created this monster yourself); you, the government told them that this was their neighborhood and they made it just that, allowing them to pay as little as $16.00 a month for rent and don’t have to work…when it really belonged to you (government). …and at one time, you were making these people feel as if they were “owning” a piece of this pie…making them “overseers,” (ouch, ouch, ouch, that word sucks), creating resident-based housing coordinators, etc., PLEASE!
Growing up, I never met a person of color who WANTED to live in a housing project…PLEASE!!!
5-You, “MR. BIGG” (Corporate America, major business owners, shipping tycoons, Law Officers (yea ya’ll got busted too, right?, Politicians, Attorney/Drug Dealer(Bodenheimer & Company), school teacher (Meth Labs in your backyard), etc. of the world who made your money off of manipulating the weak, the poor and uneducated, teaching them that selling your illegal drugs will make you rich, INSTANTLY! You told them that they could have ALL of the finer things in life this way. You sold and gave them the guns and ammunition to “protect” themselves & their territories while they sold this stuff. Now, they are the criminals that are out of control in your comfortable neighborhoods (even though you are still running further and further out the city), because they now have the mentality thinking this is definitely their way of life or death? (because the only way to rid them is to kill them off now, huh?)
6-They now feel that the American way of life takes too long now (school, college?), even though, the government has okayed private career schools to manipulate poor and ill-prepared people to sign for $10,000.00+ student loan for a less than 12 month education (who’s making the money here? sure ain’t the graduate). They get into these schools with less than a 7th grade education, can barely read or write and they are graduated anyway because of the “guaranteed government approved loans” they signed…remember, they can’t hard read it.
7-Forget the church, because some of this generation thinks that God doesn’t answer prayers FAST ENOUGH today….hmmm…the church, wow, let’s see, the priests (child molestations that have been slapped on the hands for decades until now (church vs. state???—-as Hammer would say…”can’t touch that” huh?), some of the tele-evangelists with the prayer cloths for sowing a seed to their ministries (allowed to televise because of their monies they pay for the air time) (are they government tax-exempt too, huh?), ooops, I forgot, Freedom of Religion; and they fly around in Leer jets and tell them, if you believe in what I say, you can have this kind of life too; (but they soon realize that the monies from selling drugs comes quicker); but the government also says (and that other group – ACLU) I can’t pray at work (oh, yes I can, God hears me from my heart), I can’t pray in school (oh, yes I can, He still hears me from my heart)….Preachers are now getting involved in the politics by running for the public offices…and we know that there is no such thing as “clean” politics. Rev. Bro. Preacher, you can’t have your cake and eat it too!!! We also know that it consumes a lot of time and effort…so that means that you are not able to give 100% to leading people to Christ, someone else has to stand proxy for you. However, I do hold dear to my heart, those lay men and women that I do know are out there with the prison ministries, the food and work programs for the homeless, recovering drug addicts, and other disadvantaged people teaching the way to Christ and to straighten their lives out…God is watching and He’s blessing your works as we speak here today on this forum. Do not sway, keep doing the work, you are not being ignored.
8-Some civil rights activists tell them that you have rights and you can be better and you can do better…but all they see is those leaders and their families doing better. Some of them really want to believe in you, but you have to really get in there and do something realistic. Get your hands dirty and start your own career schools with the monies that all people (all races) are putting into your national organizations and give them the education that they can’t afford, so they can stop getting deeper in debt with these unnecessary student loans. Stop depending upon the government to get it started. But we have to really give of ourselves and stop just helping ourselves. We can do this ourselves! Use the government grants and programs available to our advantage….raise the people up! For example, I love Habitat for Humanity, they don’t just “give” you a house, you must earn it, by having a job, by getting out there and help build that house…yea, getting your hands dirty~~~
Well, slavery you ask? Yep history is just repeating itself…just as the man said…ONLY BECAUSE YOU ALLOW IT TO!!! It’s just like vampires and voodoo, they can only hurt you…if you believe in them, right?
Ms. Moderator…by the way,
-
- Judas sold out Jesus for money too (ouch), He died for our freedom, (no race was chosen) huh?
- We rich people of color made a HUGE mistake hundreds of years ago…we sold people of color to other people for money…ouch!!! Thousands die because of it and thousands were handled like animals for many, many years to follow(ouch)
- Civil rights laws were established, but not without a price paid. Many died by the hands of people who hung them, hosed them, beat and shot them because they did not want this freedom to happen (ouch), and now voting rights are being questioned again? Young people….wake up!!!! What is happening here?
- Here we are in the 21st century, and you ask about slavery repeating itself?
- Yeppin’ deedie…it sure will, if we allow it to…ain’t gonna happen if I have anything to do with it…
…and if by chance, there are young generation people reading this, WAKE UP AND TAKE CONTROL OF YOUR LIVES!!!
#24 John said:
“the major flaw with this plan is that we’d be implying that there’s something wrong with someone”
I wasn’t actually joking John. I understand your sarcasm in the vein it was intended, but in this case it was unnecessary. You see, I have absolutely no problem in implying there is ’something wrong’ with people.
There’s certainly something wrong with illiteracy. There something wrong with the selfish, materialistic, short-sighted world of so-called ’street culture’. There’s something wrong with Islamic Nationalists and white Supremacists. The ‘white’ supremacists. No problem in stating that.
What I don’t understand is why we have to point to neo-Nazis as people worth listening to just because certain so-called ‘communities’ are crime- ridden yet explained away by the plainly ridiculous ‘multi-cultural’ lobby.
The genetics thing simply doesn’t wash with me.
More sensible to define what exactly IS good for American culture and what exactly ISN’T.
It isn’t about colour of skin. It’s about behaviour and cultural elements. And as yet, apart from Christianity, Martial Arts and a few Hindus, I haven’t heard anyone here state what cultural elements are either desirable for, (or else destroying) America as a Nation.
La Shawn,
I recently attended a Latin Jazz concert at the Hollywood Bowl. At one point the Latina singer said to crowd…”I know there are some of you that are not Latinos, but we like you anyway”. Can you imagine some “White” entertainer saying the same thing? The hypocrisy and double standards exist everywhere. I really don’t think she meant to be offensive, but it’s PC now to throw out those types of comments, but if a White” does the same thing….well you know.
As a white girl who grew up in the ghetto, I have seen firsthand, in the schools and public life, how the failed leftist policies have damaged the Black and Latino communities. Leftists live vicariously through the underclass, whose trails and travails they romanticize. The leftists really do not fit in with, and have a simmering resentment of, the greater society and will do anything to make Blacks and Latinos hate it too. They let the Blacks and Latinos live in opposition to the mainstream, with all the risks and consequences inherent in doing so, while the liberals do not have to suffer the consequences of such a lifestyle. Liberals are like the British and French during the French Indian wars. They use the Blacks and Latinos to fight the power structure. It can only end badly for the minorities, as it did the Indians.
#42 – Mimi
Awesome post! Loved it! Thanks for sharing…
“Liberals are like the British and French during the French Indian wars. They use the Blacks and Latinos to fight the power structure.”
I have to disagree there. I don’t think that blacks and latinos are dumb animals that can be easily used/herded by ‘liberals’.
With respect, why would it be that ‘black’ or ‘latino’ people are assigned the role of political pawns in a (white?) power game?
Is that the reasoning? If so I am stunned at how offensive that notion is. Also there is the assumption that the average liberal voter is nothing more than a ‘wiley, superior whitey’? Or else a pawn?
#32:Heliotrope
I think that your use of “personal decision” is somewhat of a misnomer since the ‘person’ the procedure is being performed on is not making the decision.
Now the existence of female circumcision in some cultures is a good example of the superiority of American culture in that respect, since it is illegal to perform such a procedure on minors and the unwilling. Likewise, the U.S. condemns this as does the World Health Organization. Such a condemnation includes all forms of female circumcision including Type I, which creates a dilemma.
Type I female circumcision is, at most, comparable to the routine male circumcision that is the acceptable norm in the U.S. This continues to be the acceptable norm despite every major medical organization declaring the procedure unnecessary. Thus, we have one instance of cultural hypocrisy that exists in the U.S.
Who said that they were dumb animals? Nobody is saying that. They were, however very vulnerable and not fully formed or assimilated into society after slavery and on into today. Liberals instituted policies and encouraged behavior in Blacks and the youth culture that were terribly damaging and had far reaching repercussions. Blacks were in fact tricked into believing that white liberals were their saviors, when in fact they were leading them to their doom in many cases. The free love and do whatever you feel culture of the 60’s didn’t have a detrimental effect on the educated white hippies who had nothing to lose as they had family money and rehab to fall back on, but the encouragement of such behavior damaged black families forever. there were no safety nets for Black men when they became addicted to alcohol, had criminal records or deserted their children in droves.
>>I have to disagree there. I don’t think that blacks and latinos are dumb animals that can be easily used/herded by ‘liberals’.
With respect, why would it be that ‘black’ or ‘latino’ people are assigned the role of political pawns in a (white?) power game?>>
I’ll risk being politically incorrect here and say that while I agree that blacks and latinos are _not_ dumb animals, they are very frequently uneducated. They can be used as political pawns in any political game – white or not – by those who are better educated and more sophisticated.
The barrier can be overcome, but that has been discussed here on other columns – that is, why are there problems achieving educational success among so many blacks and latinos.
Some people play checkers, some play chess. When a checkers player attempts to play chess with a chess player, they usually get taken to the cleaners. This isn’t a factor of intelligence, I think, but just somehow a factor of how people think and approach various problems.
#48 Shade says: “I think that your use of “personal decision†is somewhat of a misnomer since the ‘person’ the procedure is being performed on is not making the decision.”
If you follow that logic, no parent should introduce religion to a child, “force” a healthy diet on a child, etc. But I trust you are not a believer in some far out Skinner type of child rearing.
If there is a crisis involving male circumcision, I failed to notice it. Certainly it is not on any list of top 10,000 urgent world problems that I have seen.
I completely understand that there are some folks who have strong feelings on the topic. I sit on a hospital board and we have addressed the medical ethics involved. The large majority of parents of the baby boys we deliver ask for the procedure. The law does not require us to obtain the permission of the infant and since there is no (statistically insignificant) medical risk involved that requires the hospital to “protect” the child from the decision of the parent.
I am still of the opinion that circumcision is the choice of the parents. Out of interest, I called the state board and I am told that the procedure is practiced in every hospital in the state.
Just so you understand, it is voluntary and I am not aware of any insurance plan that covers delivery but does not cover the procedure.
I hope this helps explain my answer a bit better to your original query.
Great post, as usual. I am in agreement with everything you say!!
If you follow that logic, no parent should introduce religion to a child, “force†a healthy diet on a child, etc.
The problem with these examples is that the choice remains throughout that child’s life whether to remain religious or eat a healthy diet. Circumcision, for all practical purposes, is permanent. Plus, a child must eat to survive, thus logic would dictate that the best diet be utilized. If a child HAS to be circumcised for his well being, logic would dictate that the parents choose the safest procedure. The question comes with the necessity of the proceedure. It is more and more being deemed medically unnecessary and what it amounts to is a form of mutilation based on American culture’s sense of aesthetics. This is one of the very few aspects of American culture that can be deemed as questionable in my opinion.
Re 45: I don’t quite understand why being a “white girl in the ghetto” qualifies you to speak on the policy effectiveness of liberal ideas, but I have to disagree with your generalizations. You don’t attempt to address problems of such complexity and difficulty if you are not deeply committed to the potential of our great nation. Blindness and acquiescence does not make you a better patriot. Our Founders would be very unhappy people if they were here to see what their grand ideals had devolved into.
Secondly, I concur with previous disagreements regarding the placement of minority groups as pawns in some larger power struggle. Based on the collective electoral and lobbying power of African Americans and Latinos, demonstrated in much of the 20th and 21st century, this characterization is inaccurate and insulting. The efforts of marginalized men and women to realize the promises made in our constitution for a more perfect union demonstrate what it means to be American. Dare I say, no man or woman loves America more than African Americans have loved America throughout history.
Of course you are right LaShawn, but you do not spend enough time on discrimination against blacks. You concentrate on ‘dumbing down’ standards when in many cases we can’t even get in the door to prove ourselves. The New York Times just ran an article about such discrimination on Wall Street:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/14/business/14bias.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
But you could apply it to almost any sector from energy to the environment. I do understand what you are saying about the ‘leftist’ crap, but sometimes quotas and diversity programs are a bad solution to a worse problem. You will agree that race relations is a problem beyond human capability to solve (as I fear is global warming).
#55 Shade: The medical community would rarely consider circumcision to be a “necessary procedure.” In that respect you are correct.
You might rethink your original objection my comment that the decision is in the hands of the parents. (I am not one who needs “to win” the point.) I would just reassert that the legal structure of the state does not provide for a patient advocate when it involves circumcision on an infant. You may be aware that the courts have been involved on behalf of the minor patient when the parents refuse life sustaining medical treatment. This same principle of state advocacy for the minor does not apply to dental work, circumcision, establishing diets, religious teaching, attending play groups, etc. It is a matter of proportion.
As an aside, circumcision is not reversible, although prophylactic plastic surgery does amazing things.
I strongly disagree with your assertion that “It is more and more being deemed medically unnecessary and what it amounts to is a form of mutilation based on American culture’s sense of aesthetics.”
Hospitals are extremely sensitive to those procedures that fall into the “frivolous” category. Every procedure carries risk and high insurance costs. One of the reasons that so much plastic surgery is done in physician owned private surgeries is that the procedure is subject to enormous law suits and the cost of insuring the theater is enormous. That also explains why plastic surgery is so very expensive.
If circumcision were without medical merit of any sort, the medical insurance companies of the patients would drop the procedure ASAP and you would find a network of private circumcision surgeries proliferating.
Dr. Dean Adell, the radio guy, is an advocate for banning the procedure. Also, the AMA occasionally issues a paper that questions the propriety of the procedure. However, the current medical literature does not discredit the procedure. You will find, however, that countries that have socialized medicine have discontinued the procedure as not cost effective. That means that the odds of having to spend state money on an uncircumcised male are not great enough to fund the procedure.
You also note that: “This is one of the very few aspects of American culture that can be deemed as questionable in my opinion.”
“In my opinion” is a protective phrase and I respect it. On the other hand. I am not certain where I would begin if I were to try to describe American culture. I grew up in an orphanage in America and there was a culture there, but I doubt that the snapshots of life that rest in my view of reality are shared by that many others. I taught in a death row prison. I have raised my own children as well as discarded children of various ethnic groups and medical condition.
In Tennyson’s words: “I am a part of all that I have met…..” Each of us have assembled a scrapbook of memories throughout our lives that make up our “reality.” We band together in groups and our common beliefs, interests, etc. form the basis of our culture. Just what the “universal” aspects of American culture might be, I can not say.
I do not think that male circumcision has a very high position on the list of commonly proposed aspects of American culture if we were to poll the populace.
Post #58 – Heliotrope
Ditto on your last paragraph!
I agree with bits of it, but disagree with a whole bunch.
Lashaw says “It was built on human values, with recognition to God-given rights.” So I guess slavery, racism, sexism and all other notions practiced in this nation for the first 100 years or so, are human values. That’s scary….
I also disagree that the American culture is far superior than the others. Yes, the American system is very practical and works, but c’mon this is a country where less than a 100 years ago, if you weren’t white and male, you were considered a nobody.
As for the nations in third world countries where as you say various groups are fighting for power with each other. Who’s fault is it, that the African tribes have various ethnic groups fighting. Definetely a result of Westernization. I’ll talk about that a bit later.
The 1884 Treaty of Berlin divided Africa among European countries like a piece of cake. The African tribes had their own boundaries and geographical regions, their own political system, economical system and many of kingdoms flourished. The Europeans came over and re-structured the regional boundaries so that you had people from different ethnic groups living together.
And just how did Europe get rich and develop, it was through the wealth of Africa and Asia.
Why is India so poor today? In the 1870’s, there was a faminine in India. The famine wasn’t due to the scarcity of food, but because at the time India being a British colony was shipping grains to Great Britain and charging higher price to the Indians who couldn’t afford it. India never recovered from that.
How is this all linked to America. America is party of the Western World and was started by these same Europeans who were robbing Africa of its wealth and using the labor force to enrich themsleves in America in what was called the Triangular Trade (Europe, Africa, America).
It’s funny how America prides itself to be the “land of the free”
but for the first 140 years of so of this country, many minorities groups had no rights. Women didn’t get the vote until the 1920’s, and the civil rights acts wasn’t passed until 1964 which was less than 50 years ago.
Even the election system, I mean the electoral college, do we DIRECTLY vote for the president.
Interestingly, people talk about other minorities group who came from Europe who succeededd like Italians, Irish ect… and the failure of blacks to succeed. The Italians and Irish did face discrimination, but also were able to intergrate themselves better because of their skin and as a result benefited from the post war economic boom in the 1940’s and other benefits that blacks couldn’t get because of discrimination from housing to employement. Interestingly, when the black Vets returned from WWI and WWII they were disappointed that the situationw as still the same, they thought they were fighting freedom in Europe, but still didn’t have freedom at home.
and it’s not like it happened like a sunday picnic, every group that wasn’t white and male basically went through “hell” to get their sweet desserts of the American dream, some were jailed, some were killed ect….
Yup, Slavery is over. But it took a bloody war to end this. It took bloody events to get freedom. It’s funny how we’re preaching adn modelling ourselves to the rest of the world as the true example of democracy and freedom. But Freedom at what cost. We criticize governments of repressing freedom to its people, when our government did the same thing and basically discouraged the freedom of other groups.
We should label ourselves as a progressive nation, because that’s what we are and that’s what I love about America, learning from its mistakes and bettering itself.
And let’s not forget that this is the same nation that counted blacks as 3/5 of the population, that basically promoted slavery and torture and racism. That’s not very Christian Like, or you want to tell me that it’s christian principles?
I have nothing against America, it’s a progressive society and it gets better with time, but I just don’t like the notion how people keep saying that this country was founded on Christian principles. They may have used the bible as a point of reference, but I hardly call Thomas Jefferson’s behavior Christian. This is the man who lusted after his slave woman and had children with her, while still promoted a system based on slavery. IS THAT CHRISTIAN?
The bible was used as a reference point, but I’m questioning how serious they took the christianity, the same way witnesses swear or the bible but don’t necessarily practice what it preaches….
And America was no better than all the third war fighting countries when it started.
Most countries in Africa got their independence in the late 1950’s-1960’s, they are still fairly new.
and when America was a new nation, it was anything than stable. I mean, didn’t America have a civil war too that devasted the psychology of the whole country just like these civil wars we hear about in third world countries.
There’s good and bad in every country, culture, people, race. This sorta of feeling that “America is superior” is what has alienated America from the rest of the world.
America is a great countries, with positive aspect and negative aspects…
and While America is diverse, it’s definetely very segregated. I don’t see that Diversity has worked, you have white churches, black churches, hispanic churches, white neighborhoods, black neighborhoods, hispanic neighborhoods, white schools, black schools, latino schools. America is more segregated than ever
Every group live within themselves. and I don’t think people want to embrace or care about diversity as long as they are happy in their predominantly non-diverse community.
While the race relations aren’t as graphic as the ethnic issues of other third countries, there’s a feeling of hypocrisy that has risen over the years. People just stay within their corner, are fake with one another ect… Race has become too politically correct, that many people and groups choose not to express their racial opinions only the radical ones….
Just like different ethnic groups in third world countries are having issues in their relations, diversity isn’t really working in America. People are just silent, Interestingly, having lived in Europe, it’s more interesting, there’s a love and hate attitude where people express their attitudes of other groups freely (there was never a civil rights movement), race in america has become so politically correct that people don’t speak their mind. I always say that I’d rather live in an environment where I know people stab me from the front than the back. People don’t express what they feel about other groups, it stays in their head.
If race isn’t an issue, then so people shouldn’t have a problem with who runs the government. Sadly, it’s not the case. If Diversity is so well celebrated in America. All the minorities that ran for political office on both major parties never made it that far even those when you analyzed their platform objectively had potential. I’m not pushing a minorities agenda, I’m sure I’ll get accused of doing it, I seriously don’t care who’s president as long as they can do the job, then I don’t think American will care then if it’s a yellow or a brown president. Or will they? Or would many people be a little shocked or suprised….
A black friend once told me that he kept telling his son to pursue his dream and in American he can be whatever he wants to. His son told him that he wanted to be a president. The dad almost cried, how do you try to be realistic with your son without crushing his dream.
Diversity isn’t working in America. I think the whole nation has been very white washed, the reason groups don’t fight with each other for power like in third world countries is simply because people have accepted one group as the majority (white) in the media, government, education ect… and the minorities have to assimilate.
Just like pschologically, Western Europe destroyed Africa through colonization. Some may say that we brought civilization, christianity to Africa. But what makes one civilization better than the other or on what scale are we grading civilization. When the Native Americans saw Christopher Columbus, they thought of the Spanish as savages, while the Spanish thought of the Native Americans as savages. This is what happened in Africa, The Euopeans took all the wealth (remember Europe was a scarce region), forced the Africans to reject their ways and learn European ways. Then after destroying the lands, they leftm gave them their independence. What were the Africans to do. They had been robbed of their African culture, system, way of life, they assimilated to the European culture which rejected them, didn’t accept them. In other words, it was like “You tell me to learn your ways and when I do you reject me”,
They basically became “in-betweens” trying to re-capture their african past and assimilate to the European system, all in all different groups living together in one country. Of course, they’re gonna fight and kill each other…. They lost their identity.
The world has been westernized. I have nothing wrong with it, I love the western culture. To survive, you have to assimilate. When Egypt ruled the world, everyone wanted to become Egyptian, when Rome ruled the world, everyone wanted to become Roman.
In America, the minorities have to assimilate to the the majority group. If you say that diversity is working, then I’ll say that it’s working as long as each group know their place in society and we know who’s the boss.
America is whitewashed. And again, that’s okay, I have nothing wrong with that.
I link this to Ebonics. I have nothing wrong with people speaking ebonics, just like different dialects and southern accents, but I was always told that you have to know the place where to speak in Ebonics. In an interview, you have to speak with what people say like a “white person” to be better received.. An example of being whitewashed
Which brings me to what Lashawn said about “Why are groups that promote the interests of people of African or Latin American or Middle Eastern descent acceptable, but groups that promote the interests of whites, or people of European descent, unacceptable?”
What people don’t understand is the reasoning behind these culture groups. If blacks don’t feel welcome at an all white Fraternity, they are going to start their own fraternity. If blacks feel that they are not represented on mainstream television, they are going to start a BET.
Most of these “all minorities” groups and clubs, develop as a result of their alienation in the mainstream world.
I mean, what is NBC or CBS or ABC? They’re another word for White Entertainment Television, they are largely ran by Whites and most of their programs from daytime to primetime are generally predominantly whites with a few shows catered to minorities.
If a black writer is having difficulty making it in mainstream, of course, he’s gonna try to do an all black movie.
It’s example that diversity is really not working.
I have nothing with all White groups, and clubs or anything or groups and clubs catered to one particular race as long as they’re not racially motivated.
and I’ve done some research, many of all “whites” organizations tend to be racially motivated, this is why it’s always taboo. While many minorities motivation group are also racially motivated, many of them grow of out dissactification of not being represented or heard.
This brings me to affirmative action. While I don’t agree with it, at the same time, what can we do to abolish employment discrimination. There’s a lot of employement discrimination.
There was a test conducted with resume. A resume was sent to a company with a black sounding name, Tyrone Jackson, the company didn’t reply. The same resume was sent with a white sounding name Mark O-Brian and the company replied.
I’ve noticed employement discrimination, I worked for a company where the supervisor would tell hispanics and black applicants that they were fully staffed but would keep hiring whites.
So while people complain about Affirmative action, I hope they also complain about employment discrimination.
Is that embracing our diversity. I don’t think so.
There are tons of real estate discrimination, housing discrimination ect…
As much as America is progressing, it’s far from being perfect or superior.
I just hate these days, everytime you talk about discrimination, “you’re the angry black man”, even though at times it may be justified…
Like Whoopi was saying to Sean Hannity, as a former welfare mom that helped her a lot, you just can’t generalized issues, you have to take case by case.
It goes back to what I was saying earlier, the silent treatment. People just don’t speak their mind, these days, you can’t talk about discrimination or fear being labelled as a troublemaker, someone who’s living in the past. It’s hypocrisy and deinal to believe that everything is all right.
There’s not such thing as a perfect society, and America is definetely not perfect or the best nation in the world, it is a great nation, yes. I love America because it is progressive.
and I so loved Diversity, hopefully it will work one day in America. But I think it starts by acknowledging our differences, black, white, brown. I think it’s putting yourself in denial saying that we should see things in a colorless point of view. Cause it’s not gonna work, we are different. A Irish American family could have different traditions than an Asian American family. The strenghts is that accepting that we are different, but yet the same that we are all humans. Embracing our differences and merging our different background makes us strong, like a patchwork, we merge together.
The more we try to ignore race or pretend that we are colorless, we will only put ourselves in denial.
There’s nothing wrong with a Mexican American family embracing their Mexican heritage while embracing the American culture at the same time.
Just my two cents. I hope I don’t get demonized (though I know I will) for expressing different points of views. It’s just my opinion.
Sheldon and JohnD are offended and insulted by by notions and statements, that means I am doing something right. Every time someone tries to shut down disagreement with the liberal shibboleths, people, white and Black, claim to be offended or that the speaker is racist. They don’t like to hear truths. Sheldon you can read my blog where I discuss many of my arguments with liberalism. I don’t care anymore if I am called a racist. The word has lost its meaning long ago. If you care about Black people, and I do, very much, you have to point out the wrongheadedness of the current ideology being touted as the cure for Black ills. Liberalism has failed Blacks and things are getting worse for them not better. For every increase in the Black middle class, the underclass grows. The inner cities are controlled by Democrats, hard core leftists and the Unions. Time to break the chain and try something new.
I have never read a more clearer(is that a word?) thinking writer! As you can see I’m not the most polished writer, hope my meaning is Clear??:)
An oustanding piece!!
#60 Bart reports: “I’ve noticed employement discrimination, I worked for a company where the supervisor would tell hispanics and black applicants that they were fully staffed but would keep hiring whites.”
Certainly you got this information into the hands of a hungry civil rights attorney. This type of case is pure gold. (Unless the employer has no assets and his pick-up is ten years old. Rednecks hiring bodies off of the day labor wall pretty much get a pass.)
Several years ago, my employer held focus groups to understand the issues of each racial/gender group. The HR rep hosting the meeting of white males was shocked to hear that we had complaints, stunned in fact.
We gave her an earful on reverse discrimination, on the lack of recognition for our culture – as opposed to ‘black history month’ ‘hispanic month’ etc.
nothing changed though
I agree with some of this…but I love diversity..
I love all the different kinds of food, people, music, everything….but that’s me…
I think the main American Culture is yet to be defined. I think its good in its own way, just like countless others, but it aint the best. There is no “best”.
Regarding the comment, “there is a movement to mainstream mediocrity…” Are we talking academics here?
There may be, but I dont think that should be our main focus.
From what I have observed, there has been a growing movement to define problems by race. Then there are different degrees given to the severity of the problem depending on the race when it is the exact same problem across the board.
And this ties into the explosive growth of immorality and the changing definition of immorality. So much is being twisted, right is wrong, wrong is right. There is mass deception…
While a person’s wealth determines has always pretty much determined the opportunities and value of that person’s life, it is getting even more prevalent today in this country. I have never seen so much hatred and disregard of people with meager means.
I dont think we should be so much concerned with who is achieving what in school or employment when there are so many people lying, cheating, stealing, killing, disrepecting and etc…just across the board. From the common street criminals to Jeff Skilling and the late Ken Lay. Which is crazy when there is more than enough opportunity to honestly make a decent living here in America.
I guess my point is, yes achievment in school and life and all is great, but it must be built FIRST on that solid foundation of the Bible and the truths of Christ…without that, it means nothing and is fruitless. We have pretty much destroyed that foundation in this country.
I would much rather my daughter accept Christ, tell the truth, be respectful, and be a witness for others than for her to be a straight-A student and achieve “great things” in life. This is not to totally disregard the latter, which is great too, but that means nothing in eternity….
#61
I do not know what ‘liberal shibboleth’ you are accusing me of defending. My point is simply that I do not see black people as a mass of morons that are herded this way and that by smarter, more powerful whites.
The opposite of that statement isYou will find people who do think that in the confines of Amren, Stormfront, CofCC, etc. In fact they blame the ‘black ills’ on both the liberal jew and genetic inferiority. Once again, the black is a barely-human pawn in their fantasy world of White Liberal Jewry Controlling ALL to the detriment of the Whites.
I’m just stating my belief, that black people aren’t pawns for white people. If a black person turns to crime, then that’s his or her fault, same as a white person. People are always blaming failures of INDIVIDUALS onto others. Liberals and conservatives do this all the time. It’s always someone else’s fault.
Stating that white people are wily weilders of power over blacks. I call BS, it’s just another get-out clause.
Just by claiming that you pissed someone off doesn’t mean you win the argument. I piss off white supremacists who would gladly ship every last non-Germanic individual to a nominal swamp in the Congo. By your reckoning that means they are doing something right…
You say that ‘leftists’: “let the Blacks and Latinos live in opposition to the mainstream”
‘Let’? As in ‘allow’? Did you really say that?
Once again. I simply do not believe that blacks are the pawns of whites. But I do see the blame game being perpetuated forever until people start blaming the smallest minority. The Individual.
Make of that ‘liberal shibboleth’ what you will.
I totally agree Luke NC. I’m a born again Christian and liberal. Most people say that you can’t be a liberal if you’re a christian. But I believe in free choice. The bible gives us free choice, God gives us a choice. It’s up to us to do the right thing. That’s what makes being a Christian reward, the fact that you’re sacrificing your own desires for the love of God.
I’m against the government telling people how to lead their lives, who should they have sex with. Yes, I’m against gay marriages, but I’m also against anti-sodomy laws. It’s not up to me to tell people who they should have sex it or not.
I’m pro life, but I believe that it is up to the woman to make the decision, deal with her own morals and ethics and pay for the consequences of the action. It’s not up to me to decide what a woman does with her body.
I’m really worried about this anti-gay movement, I wonder if it’s to preserve the values or just people’s homophobia. When you have conservatives you have been married many times and now are preaching about marriage being between a man and a woman, it’s a bit ironic.
Gay marriage hardly affect any straight marriages. Plus America preaches freedom of religion. Using religion as a mean to stop gay marriages would totally not make sense. Because not everyone is Christian.
So, how do I do my duty as a Christian. Basically, my job is to preach the good news. God doesn’t need our help, he can fight his own battles. Christian do more harm with all their protestations and marches about the fall of America’s values and all, all you do is alienate potential souls to Christ.
The more people are going to have agressive anti-gay agenda, the more the gay movement will just rise. Because we’re doing nothing but alienate them.
Just like when your parent tells you not to do something, you do it anyway.
We’re fighting this the wrong way.
It’s really simple.
If each Christian in America brings one soul to Christ, then what you have is a nation full of Christian. If a nation is full of christian, then the government is going to be full of christians. If the governmetn if full of Christians, then we wouldn’t waste time talking about whether to allow gay marriages or not, because we will all be opposed it. Even everyone is Christian in America, then we don’t have to worry about our values being lost and all, since everyone will be following the bible. Abortion, gay marriages will not even be issues to discuss about.
There are simpler ways. As a christian, I love everyone including gays, I don’t like the sin, just like God doesn’t like the sin. My goal is to preach the good news to my neighbors. Pray God and have faith that through me he will touch the unbelievers to believe in Christ and get saved.
That’s it, all this anger, manifestion, worries and frustration about the fall of America is a waste of time, just go around the world and preach the good news.
The notion of preserving and alienating America or like Lashawn stresses on being superior and all, as a christian, I choose not to see things that way. Because God/Jesus sees us as the same, Yes, I’m American and pertain to the American culture and way of life, but first and foremost, I’m Christian and on the last judgement, I will be judged as a Christian, not as an American.
There’s nothing wrong being proud of your heritage whether it be American, black, Irish, Italian, German, Indian ect…and embracing it and wanting to represent it as long as it’s not racially motivated or doesn’t have nationalistic tones of think that my nation is better than yours, but I don’t think it’s right to think oneself as better. To say that I’m an American, therefore we have superior ideals is not right, because to God, we’re all the same regardless of where we come from our the society’s structure we abide by.
Again, I’m not forcing my religion or telling people to become Christian, we all have the freedom to the religion we choose to follow, As a Christian I was just talking about my duty (to preach the good news) and thoughts as a follower of the Christian religion.
I too agree, Luke, diversity works only when people embraces the differences (music, people, food, ect…), We are all the same, but we’re different and once we learn to accept our differences and embrace/share it, we can succeed.
Speaking on Education. Education isn’t just a black issue, it’s an issue affecting kids. Conservative blame liberals of keeping blacks down. But when are we going to stop talking about the negative and problems issues of blacks or minorities
Both conservatives and liberal do it.
There’s good and bad in every culture, but we always focus (especially the media) on the positive aspects of the majority (whites) and negative aspects of the minorities.
There are always going to be problems no matter what.
Is the Ghetto any worse than the Suburbs. I really don’t think so.
Why are suburban school better funded than inner cities schools?
Oprah had an entire documentary on education. And it’s not failing among blacks.
America ranks in the 20’s among the best education system in the world, it’s gone down and behind countries such as France, Japan, India. So, We’re definetely not better than the rest of the world.
Suburban schools have a high rate of drop out students. Students don’t feel motivated to go to school.
I lived in the Suburbs of New York for a couple of years and the way parents spoiled their kids was really puzzling. I knew one kid who got into a car accident on a weekend partying hard with his friends, that next monday, his parents had already bought him a new car.
Suburban kids (mostly whites) are as dysfunctional as Ghetto Kids, If I can put it that way. They don’t care about education, they care about partying, getting drunk, getting high and spending money.
Parents overwork themselves so they afford living in nice areas, but the guilt of not spending time with their children propels them to spoil them like crazy.
Suburban schools have up to date equipments, technology, one high school that was shown on Oprah had a personal exercising gym for students.
While an inner city school had a beat down swimming pool that hadn’t been in used.
But suburban students don’t care about school. They’re not motivated to work hard, everything is handed to them.
It’s funny how people complain that everythign is given to inner city people as they are a bunch of spoon fed people.
But these suburban kids, the future of America are spoon fed and don’t really care about schools, or career plans.
I’ve seen it in my own eyes.
So what makes them any better than Ghetto Kids. Why aren’t we addressing the issues of suburban kids. More and more people are starting to notice this trend.
and Long Island which is the main suburb area of new york is the Suburb to have the highest number of HIV/AIDS cases among all the other suburbs. I worked as an HIV/AIDS activist on the island for a few years giving work shops to high school students about HIV/AIDS.
But you never see the media address these issues.
No, the problem is those liberals and the ghetto and blacks kids failing in education, well white kids are failing in education.
I went to an inner city school, we didn’t have a football team, couldn’t afford it, our athletic team was really limited. It was a good school.
But I remember during senior years how kids were working hard to get to a college, even the mediocre students were trying to get into some community college.
conducting these workshops I did to high school students in the suburbs, the drop out rates were high, the suburban kids didn’t care about college, nope, too busy to party, buy the latest fashion and show off their cars.
What was unfair was that many students in my high school had to take remedial classes in their freshman year of college, only if you were in the Honors program that you had a chance for up to date education.
While the suburban schools had the materials and the up to date education to get sudents ready for college.
Again, it’s not even the inner city school, even in the rural areas of the south, education system is behind. On the Oprah documentary, one girl (white) was valedictorian of her high school, but she was academically behind when she started college. she was crying that her entire freshman year had been wasted taking remedial courses, she should have taken in high school. Her high school didn’t even lab equipments (microscope) for biology.
It was so sad for that girl. The education system is failing and yes, I think it’s the government’s job to do something about it. Otherwise, why do I vote for a president.
Interestingly, there are more republicans/Conservatives in Long Island, I guess it’s okay to hand everything to your children and give them everything and never have them learn the value of working hard for your buck, but it’s not okay for the government to take care of the less fortunate.
Black kids aren’t the only one failing in Education, whites kids too.
As for the issue of Welfare, well I think it’s the government’s job to take care of its own people or why do we need a president or a government then. People shouldn’t have to pay insurance, hospitals should be free.
Yep, it is the government’s job to help those who can’t (blacks, whites, yellows, browns), poverty is across all group not just black. people may be shocked, but what if X is born out of a single mother who works hard to make ends meat. Is it X’s fault, should X be doomed for life for not succeeding. Shouldn’t the government
it’s the Christian thing to help one another. Yes, people are tired of the so called “black leaders”, I’m sure they have their flaws, but I really doubt them and all the liberals who want to help have this wicked complex agenda in their head to keep the oppressed people down. I would like to believe that they want to help, because it’s our job to help those others in a worse situation.
Going back to what I was saying about the Christian preaching the good news, if we all helped each rise up, then maybe we can begin to erase, poverty, inequality ect… I think the distinction is that when we help, we have to make sure that those will help, it’s actually betterin their situation on the long run, than just on the short run.
I guess on the liberal side I believe in social programs, but I guess on the conservative I believe that social programs and welfare programs should be for everyone.
Poverty, Education, unemployment, discrimination affect everyone not just blacks (So I guess in a way, some of you may agree with me on this)
We need to look at these issues as American issues affecting the society while at the same time recognizing/accepting/embracing the differences and plurarity of what makes the American society.
Imagine if Jesus charged everyone who was sick for healing.
and for those of us like me who are Born Again Christian, do God charge us everytime we go to him for our problem?
Sparky: “I recently attended a Latin Jazz concert at the Hollywood Bowl. At one point the Latina singer said to crowd…â€I know there are some of you that are not Latinos, but we like you anywayâ€. Can you imagine some “White†entertainer saying the same thing? The hypocrisy and double standards exist everywhere. I really don’t think she meant to be offensive, but it’s PC now to throw out those types of comments, but if a White†does the same thing….well you know.”
To me it doesn’t bother me either way as long as it’s not racially motivated whoever says something like that.
There’s also been this tendency for the minorities to say things like that because of the notion that they are the “oppressed people”
My take is that hate breeds hate. it’s the legacy of slavery and bad race relations in America.
the Whites of today are blamed for the sins of their fathers that they can’t express themselves culturally, while the other minorities group are just doing what writer Bell Hooks says “Talking Back”, now they have the power to do so.
it’s interesting that people complain about minorities group, programs aimed at minorities, cultural months of minorities today.
But 100 years ago, every thing was catered to the needs of the white population, if you were white in 1906, you had more chances of succeeding in the American system than if you were a non-white. Every opporunity or benefits given by the government could be enjoyed only by whites.
For instance after 1945, most people who could benefit from the GI Bill were whites, most people who could enjoy the economic boom in the 1950s were whites. Even though blacks had fought for “freedom” they couldn’t enjoy the GI Bill.
This happened less than a hundred years ago.
Now the situation is reverse with apparently more programs as people say that are handed down to minorities and the rise of reverse discrimination.
Hate only breeds more Hate. Whites hate blacks, blacks hate whites, discrimination, reverse discrimination. It’s a generational.
Some people say that slavery is over, the generation of today had nothing to do with this.
Yes, but we are far from being the perfect example of good race relations, simply because we’re reaping what the previous generations sowed.
while on one hand, we are reaping the economic/political/social stability that the past generations sowed, we are also reaping the negative aspects (race relations) that the past generations sowed.
An example, the children of those who benefited from the GI Bills had an advantage to those who didn’t. Their parents could provide for them, provide for their college education and launch them into society as well educated, raised and financially taken care of individuals.
Yes, in America everyone has an opportunity to succeed if they worked hard at it, but some people have an easier chance than others depending on where/how they were raised. I definetely don’t think that blacks can blame slavery for the lack of their success. But at the same time, because of the various opportunity this nation provided to the white population for over 100 years inlcuding white immigrants like Italians and Irish in the 1920s benefited, it gave them an economic advantage from generation to generation.
There are some generational “curse” that has remained becasue of all the crazy past. We cannot ignore it.
Just like there’s some generation baggage that people have personally because of their family history.
Of course, the only way to break all generational curse is through accepting Jesus Christ for me, for those who follow the Christian Faith. I always say that Church is the only colorless, classless, genderless environment, but at the same time you have to be realistic, that whe you step out of the church, it’s the world and you can’t expect to have the colorless mentality, you have to know the world to be able to live in it and not be ignorant of what is going on, the issues, the problems ect…
As for someone’s comments on black history, again, one has to understand the context to which it was being created. If it was a response to the lack of the African American culture being embraced in the mainstream american culture, then I guess there’s no problem with it, as it’s an education tool for people to learn about another cutlure.
If black history month was racially motivated, then I guess there’s a problem.
But then I guess we should have a problem wtih St Patricks’ day, which is an Irish Holiday too.
The difference between whites and blacks is that many whites easily know their background. Irish American, German American, Italian American, Greek American.
Because of slavery, black americans (not those who immigrated in the last 60 years or so from the Carribbean or African) don’t know where they slave came from
this is why you don’t have Senegalese American or Congolese American. You have African Americans, because they were taken from the African Continent, but we don’t know where.
So of course, there’s no White History Month. But there are Irish Holidays (St Patrick) and events that are culturally aimed at whites, but it’s specifically aimed at a group because whites american unlike blacks american arent lumped into one group as people of European descent, they can easily trace their roots.
I don’t think people will have a problem with Italian American month, in fact, my public library actually had events for Italian American pride heritage day, once…
I think those events are good, again if they are not racially motivated. Becasue we can learn about each other’s different cultures.
“but I really doubt them and all the liberals who want to help have this wicked complex agenda in their head to keep the oppressed people down.”
Bart, I recommend you try googling the phrase ‘liberal agenda’ and you will be proved so wrong that you’ll be forced to apologize via the weight of shame. (sarcasm off)
The ‘liberal’ agenda is to keep all blacks down so the liberal elite can flourish in it’s selfish self-righteous enclave. Just like the ‘conservative agenda’ is to…er, guess what!??
Yes! To keep all blacks down so that the Conservative elite can flourish in it’s sel-righteous enclave.
Only the most partisan of political pundits would repeat such ludicrous phallacies. It is such a dishonest method of discourse. The irony is, I feel that people who use such language are more alike than they are different. I have American friends who vote both republican and democrat, yet they get along just fine, like most humans who aren’t self-absorbed extremists arguing 24/7 that their opponents are evil and ‘using the poor blacks’.
ARgGH. It makes me so mad. They can’t hear themselves.
It’s sad that America (online?) is gladly veering towards mass-acceptance of these oft-repeated partisan propaganda soundbytes.
I’m puzzled by your comments, do you mean that I’m a “self absorbed extremist….” or “people who use such language”
Are these aimed directly at me.
I think I am entitled to my own opinion whether right or wrong. We can disagree without dismissing someone’s view point in an insulting way, just use your evidence to back up what you’re saying as “ludicrous phallacies” is wrong.
I disagreed with a lot of what Lashawn said, but I used the evidence I had to talk about my view point and How I came to shape them.
Yes it is sad that people can’t just agree to disagree, and are called “extreme partisan of political pundits”.
I definetely don’t believe in any party. I vote both parties and agree with exactly what you say about the polarization of the American politics and society.
People vote a party rather than the best man for the job
But both parties are guilty of that.
Look at Anne Coulter’s book “How to talk to a Liberal if you must”
The title alone breathes division.
Why can’t we learn to agree to disagree.
Why is someone who is expressing his freedom of speech and criticizes the government is doomed unpatriotic.
Lately, the notion is that you’re unpatriotic if you don’t support/endorse or agree with the government.
Aren’t we all capable of making our own decisions and drawn our own conclusions in life.
Anne Coulter is definetely guilty of a lot of comments that are aimed to created more division.
Making jokes about Timothy Mcveight and the New York Times building, about how women having the right to vote makes it harder for republicans to win and many more….
Yes, she’s exercising her freedom of speech.
If anyone tries to make comments that are not pro-government these days, they are called moonbats by Michelle Malkin.
Why can’t we respect each other’s differing view points and agree to disagree.
This whole conservative vs liberals has become so childish.
It’s like conservative want the world country to think conservatives and liberals want the whole country to think liberals.
It’s funny because when Clinton was in power, these same people who call those who criticize Bush, unpatriotic were doing the same thing.
So I guess, when we have a liberal president, the conservative are unpatriotic and when we have a conservative president, the liberal are unpatriotic.
La Shawn-if you make through all of the comments above, God bless you. Another great post, well written and an example of why so many people keep returning here.
You mentioned typos would be fixed-you missed an “of” in the 9th paragraph. Not picking on you-just helping out. Keep up the great work!
# 71 No Bart, it wasn’t directed at you at all.
It was in reference to the extremists who mindlessly regurgitate partisan propaganda. i.e.
“The (liberal/conservative) has a selfish and racist agenda and uses blacks to further it”
>>I’m really worried about this anti-gay movement,>>
Your worry is for naught. There _is_ no “anti-gay” movement. There is resistance to a “pro-gay” agenda, but that does not equate to “anti-gay”.
#74
Suek, I can only imagine that you are unaware of the anti-homosexual literature, websites, propaganda and groups that exist?
Should we put homosexuality on the list of things that are bad for America? That is a serious question. Because there are many people who believe that to be the case, and there are many many groups that paint gays to be abominable, criminal, bestial, diseased harbingers of destruction.
Either you aren’t watching, or you aren’t admitting it. But these people are there, from Christian and Muslim groups, to the American Family Association, to the extreme godhatesfags. The real far right
To re-label the open hatred and demonizing of homosexuals as benign ‘opposition to a pro-gay agenda’ just doesn’t wash. No way can you explain away the reams of propaganda and open hatred of gays from far right and religious groups to be simple ‘resistance’. Many of them claim that homosexuals have always been abominations from biblical times. So these people aren’t coming from a defensive position. It was supposedly written down by God himself that homosexuality is evil.
Just like the Taliban are anti-Satan agenda-ists
Yes. And those nice neo-Nazi people are simply anti-Jewish agenda, and anti-black agendas. Oh, and anti gay agendas.
Come on! Call a spade a spade for heaven’s sake.
#74 suek
Well said! No need to clarify your clear statement.
As you undoubtedly know: never try to wash the feet of a cat. It is a waste of time and it annoys the cat.
Well as a christian, what scares me is what comes out of the mouth of some religious leaders, like Farwell blaming 9/11 on the gays and abortionists and Jimmy Swaggart saying that he’ll kill any gay man that looks at him the funny way.
Speaking From a religious point of view, shouldn’t there be another way to “save” the gays.
As Christians, do we want to save the gays, or do we want them to burn in hell?
When, it comes down to it, homosexuality is a sin, just like a white lie, just like simple “eye” adultery (looking at a woman in a lustful way). or What about divorce which is a high rate among christians.
My goal isn’t to judge but to preach the good news to anybody and get them saved whether they are alcoholics, gays or whatever ect….
The story of Mary Magdalene in the bible pretty much sums it up.
I guess there should be a resistance to the “white lies” movement too, God knows, we’re all guilty of that on an everyday basis.
>> I can only imagine that you are unaware of the anti-homosexual literature, websites, propaganda and groups that exist?>>
Law of nature – equal and opposite reaction.
>>Many of them claim that homosexuals have always been abominations from biblical times.>>
True. Homosexuality has always been considered morally sinful. This is the year 2006. Do you claim that such groups against homosexuality existed in … say…1956?
If not – and I’m here to say they did not – then what is the difference between then and now?
Heliotrope: Yet another slur against me, assumedly because you didn’t agree with my statement. I make that three now. I would appreciate it if you could argue a point without resorting to insults. I read anti-gay propaganda from groups who are anti-gay. So I state that as a fact. You claim that as underhanded discussion by way of calling me a sly creature that cannot be washed by the truth of your claim. But your claim is just an insult.
Suek: You claimed there are no anti-gay groups. I claim there are.
Next there are no anti-whaling groups, just opposition to the pro-whaling agenda.
There are no anti-American groups, just opposition to the American agenda.
There are no Anti-’Zog’ groups, just opposition to the dirty ‘Zog’ agenda.
This has been a real education. I’m sure Fred Phelps is neither anti-Gay or anti-American. He’s just an equal reaction?
What was Hitler? An equal reaction to the filthy Jewish agenda?
La Raza? An equal reaction to the black and white American agenda?
I mean, please, where is your point of reference to flatly claim there is ‘no anti-gay movement’ – yet you then defend or excuse anti-homosexual literature, and propaganda with the claim that it is an ‘effect of nature?’
I am seriously interested in why you claim that there are no ‘anti-gay’ movements. I wonder if you can answer that?
John, Sorry, I totally mis-understood your comments and over-reacted. Sorry. You definetely have a lot of good points though
#79 JohnD. You have run smack into the wall of your own mindset.
I addressed suek, who faithfully posts thoughtfully on this site.
I cautioned her: “As you undoubtedly know: never try to wash the feet of a cat. It is a waste of time and it annoys the cat.”
A cat licks its own paws and other parts. It grooms itself, is not subject to teaching tricks (hence the paucity of animal stunts done by the household feline) and maintains an air of independence. T.S. Elliot revealed their habits very well.
It is a waste of time to wash a cat’s paws as your efforts will not exceed its own abilities to groom itself. Furthermore, these aloof creatures don’t like the process. They have claws and teeth to put emphasis on how much it annoys them.
Sometimes, it is best to walk away from goading and argument rather than to stir up a bunch of give and take that has no more merit than a tempest in a teapot.
Had I taken my own advice, I would not have tried to engage some of your previous posts. Having come to understand the method of your discourse, I have chosen to ignore your fatuousness. In the years that I taught semantic logic, I always took time to give way to the student who thought he was the master of the course before he understood the fundamentals.
But in the real world, when one finds himself being poked by someone who believes himself to be a master of debate, but is without a clue, it is best to walk away.
You have a good day. I will not disturb your reverie any further.
# 80. That’s OK Bart. Thanks. I own I’m a clumsy writer at times.
# 81. Heliotrope, sorry for the mistake, for what it’s worth. I do not believe I’m a ‘master of debate’ as you so accuse. That was perhaps another assumptive insult of yours? I am actually quite a clumsy writer and fully aware of it, but I have an open heart and and an enquiring mind. I ask straight questions and argue the point, and NEVER attack the poster.
I have only ever (politely) asked for the same respect from you, and that you address the content of my posts and not make attacks. You did not respond to the polite requests or address the content, so I will agree not to engage you in debate any further. Nothing gained, nothing lost.
Regards,
John.
suek, your first comment, regarding the logical result of “diversity” being the banning intermarriage, was brilliant.
It is this sort scrutiny to which dumb ideas must be exposed.
>>I am seriously interested in why you claim that there are no ‘anti-gay’ movements. I wonder if you can answer that?>>
Tell you what…suppose you answer my questions first:
We agree that the Bible states unequivocably that homosexuality is immoral, right? So….
How long has the Bible been around?
How long have these “anti gay movements” been around?
How long have the “pro-gay movements” been around?
Any estimate within about 10-20 years will suffice for the two movements.
A century or two will be close enough on the Bible.
As for Phelps…he and his group are money grubbers who have found a way to cause massive reaction from the most people so that they can find the deep pockets to support their way of life. I know what he _says_ and does…I have no idea what religious beliefs he may have. He’s despicable. I don’t really believe he’s religiously motivated – I think he’s a con man.
Darkknight…
Thank you for taking it in the spirit intended – I’m aware that it could be misconstrued…
John D writes :”That’s OK Bart. Thanks. I own I’m a clumsy writer at times.”
Well, at least it wasn’t as bad as the way I wrote. Usually, I tend to just write as if I was speaking in discussion boards and let it all out, then I re-read, it’s a total mess. I hope it wasn’t too hard for you to read some of the stuff I said.
John Writes: “I have only ever (politely) asked for the same respect from you, and that you address the content of my posts and not make attacks. You did not respond to the polite requests or address the content, so I will agree not to engage you in debate any further. Nothing gained, nothing lost.”
These days, it’s hard to agree to disagree with people and not just politics, everything from fashion to cars to movies. Why does it always have to come down to I’m right, you’re wrong. someone once said that “creativity always results out of conflicts”
Whoopi said something to Sean Hannity that she’d rather spends her days with people who have opposing viewpoints because it makes her think.
Doesn’t it get boring reading comments after comments that reinforces your belief, all it leads to are people massaging each other’s posts. I agree, I agree, I agree.
A writing professor used to tell us that whenever you write a persuasive essay, always talk about counter arguments to your proposed argument. It makes your paper stronger and if you can refute or argue these counter arguments with backed evidence, then you have won your audience.
I definetely enjoyed reading the 80 something replies, I was afraid I would get “punched at” considering that this is a blog that is run by a non-liberal and wasn’t sure what would be the reaction to a lot of what I was saying, but it turned out just fine.
By the way, I’m a new poster, do you guys know if Lashawn participates in discussion, I’m just curious to know what she thinks of what everyone had to say.
It was a good read.
Suek,
anti gay movements can be traced back as early as the previous centuries where gays were burned and jailed. Leonardo Da Vinci did some jail time for committing sexual relations with other men, same with writer Oscar Wilde.
Of course, it’s more flagrant today, because people are more open and out with their sexuality leading to what is known as the “gay community” in the previous centuries, people kept their sexuality a secret but it isn’t to say that they weren’t still persecuted, cause they were. Even in the earlier parts of the centuries, Hitler target gays as well.
Today, the anti-gay movement is more known because the gay community is more known.
Again, I can’t tell people who to be intimate with, as long as it doesn’t affect or harm me. Whatever goes behind people’s closed door is not my business but theirs as long as it isn’t harmful/lethal/dangerous or life threatning to society. Some people may bring the AIDS issue, but AIDS is a disease that affects both homosexual and heterosexual. and If it was just a “gay disease”, how did it spread to heterosexual or how did it spread to the sub-saharan African region where it’s affecting millions regardless of age, race, gender and sexual orientation. I still have to see the link between how AIDS (the so-called gay disease) went from the gay community to subsaharan africa. I doubt that Sub-Saharan Africa has a large gay out and open gay community considering that homosexuality is still a “secret” activity in many places in Africa.
Interestingly, Shakespeare, Walt Witman, Langston Hughes, Oscar Wilde were all known to be homosexuals, and their books are required readings in English classes in high school and college and we have all enjoyed their works. Or what about the famous painting “the creation of Adam” by Michaelangelo who had affairs with men
Could all of this be also classified as pro- gay agenda? So does that mean we have to resist all of this and ban these books from high school curriculum?
Helitrope said “As you undoubtedly know: never try to wash the feet of a cat. It is a waste of time and it annoys the cat. ”
I always take these type of statements as a way of just ending the argument quickly
1) either because what the other person says has some logic or make sense and they don’t want to admit it.
2) because people are too stuck in their own beliefs that when it’s challenged they don’t want to do the effort of looking things from another perspective, BUT if they are certain that their argument is 100% on target, then what’s the big deal.
That’s why I stopped watching FOX NEWS, definetely was more interesting than all the other news channels, but the anchors just didn’t give a chance to those who had opposing viewpoints, it was “it’s time to wrap up, we gotta go to commercial”
>>I always take these type of statements as a way of just ending the argument quickly>>
I believe the comment was made to me, and was a reference to the fruitlessness of arguing with someone whose mind was already made up.
>>…the anchors just didn’t give a chance to those who had opposing viewpoints, it was “it’s time to wrap up, we gotta go to commercialâ€>>
I prefer Fox because they _do_ have input from various points of view, but I agree with you on this point. I find the anchors unbelievably rude on occasion. Overriding the guest with the host’s own views, and simply cutting them off are equally annoying. There are some shows in particular that I simply don’t watch because they rile me this sort of discourtesy. On the other hand, it also annoys me that Brit Hume has become senior enough that he always has a sub on Friday nights, and too many other times! He’s good – I’d _never_ give him a night off!
>>anti gay movements can be traced back as early as the previous centuries where gays were burned and jailed. Leonardo Da Vinci did some jail time for committing sexual relations with other men, same with writer Oscar Wilde.>>
I think we need to separate anti-gay _actions_ from anti-gay _movements_. The first is an incident, which may be based on individual (or group) action. The second is the organization that attempts to achieve certain societal ends through organized social and political efforts.
In previous centuries, homosexuality was viewed as a sin and as moral degeneracy. Individuals who practice homosexuality have been ignored or persecuted depending on the society and/or authority in power at the time.
>>Today, the anti-gay movement is more known because the gay community is more known.>>
Today, the gay community is more known because they have formed activist movements demanding that they be accepted as “normal” and entitled to rights that have been reserved to families, which society has determined need special rights for the benefit of that society.
>>Could all of this[referring to works created by homosexuals] be also classified as pro- gay agenda? >>
Are you saying that the work cannot be separated from the person’s sexual persona? I think that would be an absurd position to take.
>>So does that mean we have to resist all of this and ban these books from high school curriculum?>>
See above. The works should rise or fall on their own merit. Why ever would you think that a person’s personal morality would determine the acceptability of their artistic works?
what time is Brit Hume’s show on, is it during the day? I always see him only during specials like election coverage. But I do like him a lot.
Another one I like is that guy on saturday night during O’Reilley’s slot, from the heartland or something, he’s good.
Of course, I agree that someone’s artistic’s abilities have nothing to do with their own personal life.
But I was wondering and just posing it as a question to see if people who were opposed to homosexuality/homosexuals would have a problem enjoying their artistic work.
Because for instance, lately, you have parents worrying that their children might be exposed to gay studies in school, I bring this up, because a few months ago, a teacher had assigned to his class a book about a prince who falls in love with another prince and people were mad.
but at the same time, they would not have problem having their kids read books written by homosexuals.
It’s a tough issue, the school curriculum. For isntance, when I went to school in biology class, they thought us evolution and other theories about the creation of the world and mankind which went against what I believed. My parents used to tell me that you just got to follow the system. In your heart, you know it’s a bunch of bolonis, but just study it the way they teach you and pass teh class. Same thing when I was required to take a Yoga class for gym, instead of doing meditation, my parents would tell me just use that time to pray.
The education curriculum has to be free of religion, unless you go to a religious-oriented school. I am against home-schooling and even religious type of schooling, because you can’t shelter kids, they will eventually face the big bad world. It’s up to the parents to equip their children and trust in God (Again for those who are Christian) so that they can be strong enough to face anything. Lots of parents worry about sending children to the so-called predominantly liberal university. How can you fight/resist the world, if you don’t know what’s in the world
So, I was/am wondering that’s all….
>>Because for instance, lately, you have parents worrying that their children might be exposed to gay studies in school, I bring this up, because a few months ago, a teacher had assigned to his class a book about a prince who falls in love with another prince and people were mad.
but at the same time, they would not have problem having their kids read books written by homosexuals.>>
I see a major difference here, don’t you? It’s possible that if you really tortured the material in some of the classics that you could find something that was directly connected to homosexuality, but for the most part, they are plays/stories/poems that have nothing to do with sexual orientation. Sexual orientation is irrelevant. I understand that some people object to the work of known deviants on the sole basis of that deviancy, but I disagree with that point of view.
On the other hand, a book written specifically about a homosexual relationship from the standpoint of “and they lived happily ever after – isn’t that nice” is gay propaganda, as far as I’m concerned. I’d object to it also.
>>The education curriculum has to be free of religion, unless you go to a religious-oriented school. I am against home-schooling and even religious type of schooling, because you can’t shelter kids, they will eventually face the big bad world. It’s up to the parents to equip their children and trust in God (Again for those who are Christian) so that they can be strong enough to face anything.>>
You don’t expose children to external forces when they are not equipped to deal with them (ideally). The parents job is to prepare them for “the big bad world” and each has to do it as they see fit. Your choices are your own, of course…and it may work for you and yours. I wouldn’t criticize you for your choice, or others for their choices. You will see in time if you make good decisions. Of course, it will be too late then to change the outcome
! I disagree with your choice – I wouldn’t teach a child to swim by throwing him/her into the deep end – but if you’re a parent, it’s your job, and your choice.
equipping the child would mean that I would make sure the child knows how to swim before letting them go in the pool.
Just like It’s parents’ job to talk to kids about all the issues of the this world that typically they get exposed to in school and give them tools how they may deal with it, because parents aren’t going to be there 24/7.
LaShawn,
Whew!! You are not taking any prisoners with this one! When are you writing your first book?
-from another “independent conservative”
However, you did make several blunders, the least of which is giving too much credit to our Founders’(who did not come up with our principles on their own). Although many of the founders opposed chattel slavery, to say we were founded on “human values”, while cognizant of the fact that blacks were 3/5 of a man is enough to undermine their legendary status. Furthermore, it is widely known that Ben Franklin took many democratic principles from the Iroquois.
To the contrary. My focus was not on the founders’s motives, which I made crystal clear in the post. Whether they were “for” or “against” slavery is irrelevant. If they didn’t intend to include blacks, it is their fault they didn’t specifically exclude blacks. I focused instead on the ideals that make America great, not the men who applied them to their new experiment or their personal beliefs about blacks. The blunder is your misreading of the post. And I seriously doubt the Iroquois’s “democratic principles,” whatever they may be, influenced the drafting of either the Declaration of Independence or U.S. Constitution.
– Admin
Is no one going to ask “WWJD?” ? Or dare we not bring that up?
Comments on this entry are closed.